Semi-weekly south Kentuckian. [volume] (Hopkinsville, Ky.) 1883-1889, 1887-02-08

ternal duties TO perform. and L vii
gladly perform them even at great
sacrifice. A clearly stated tthe law
in the New Testament would play
into the hands of those who are striv-
ing TO save themselves by their own
righteousness. Multtudes would, IN
this spirit, go up to the house of God
every Sunday, with their 1.-THE offer.
ings, saying God l thank thee that
am not as other men, or even as those
stingy men around me. / give tithe'
of all that l possess Under the Gov
er of the title law, they would &c
down to their houses justified in theil
own estimation, feeling that they had
a conscience void of offense toward
God and towards men.
1t is true that 1.-THE law ought not
to be held responsible for such per-
verse Interpretation of its meaning,
but even thus danger has been antici.
pated' and the Lord has by his silence
on this point left us without any ex-
cuse for such an exhibition of self
righteousness and by his declaration
that the Lord loveth a cheerful givei
who gives voluntarily and not of me-
cessiiy, he has clearly taught Us that
Il 1.-THE or any other proportion of oul
property offered as the purchase money
of our salvation is abomination in his
sight. Rather would he see his treas.
ury forever empty than filled with
costly gifts of self-righteousnes
| Cl.ll ...sall.l.l AZ al al
No, no, but let them come simply as
thank Offering, and not as a sub
stitute for the blood Offering which
alone can procure Gods favor.
2. A rigid enforcement of 1.-THE
law In Christian churches might be
attended with undue hardships in
some cases. The spirit of Chrisliani-
ty is Il will have money and not sac
rilice.' The 1.-THE law is not severe
one. When the Lord gives us ten
dollars, and we use nine of them for
our own enjoyment, and only one for
religious purposes, that one is but a
small expression of what is due from
us to our Benefactor it is but small
contribution to the noblest of all
purposes. But no definite law as to
our religious gifts can work with
equality IN all cases. Brother A. has
an income of $1,000 a year
derived from rents without any per-
sona labor on his part. Brother b
has an income of $1,000 as the result
of severe labor 500 from each OF
these men would not be an equal ex-
preston of their individual sacrifices
Brother c. and Brother ID. receive
equal wages. G. has no family; ID
has a large and growing family thai
are demanding more tlian'he is able
to obtain from his most diligent ef-
forts. A 1.-THE from G. would mean
the loss of not comfort nor luxury.
A 1.-THE from ID. would mean the loss
Of many comforts aud luxuries, per-
haps even to the point of suffering
Not word in the New Testament
puts 1t in the power of Pope, Priest,
or church to say to d: "If you are
not as ready as &. to bring your tithes,
the Lord will not. regard YOU with
favorn Flt II
3. The existence of a itiihc law
might lead many TO believe that their
obligation TO give to the cause of
Christ is limited to the tenth of their
property. But the foundation princi-
Pile of Chris tan liberality is Eye are
not your own.' The Apostles of Christ
forsook all and followed him. They |
did not offer one tenth Of their fishes |
and retain nine tenths for their own
enjoyment. They gave up all their
means oflivelihood and alltheir pros
poets offuture wealth and devoted
their time aud energy to the service
ofChrist, enduring lardships aud pri.
valions compared with which the Of
fering ola 1.-THE would have been very
Insignificant. Suppose the church at
Jerusalem had learned on their or
ganization that they would be expect
ed to conform rigidly TO 1.-THE law.
Rich men like Banabas would
have brought their tithes, and |
cheerfully laid them at the Apostles
feet for the benefit OF the church
and when called upon for further
contributions they would have said,
stT hava dana .nv. full lnt,, AL ....1 /